Calling for eco-peace: reimagining interconnected peace education

ABSTRACT

In this critical co-constructed auto-ethnographic article we draw on research from two contexts, exploring how critical peace education can be more than palliative care in times of ecological collapse and profound crises across ecosystems. Examining the current crises of learning, living and being, we call for eco-peace-based education: grounded in interconnectedness and interdependence, as a way to transgress unsustainable violences on personal, interpersonal, and ecological levels. We focus on three main arguments that extend learning about nature, to learning with and in nature, towards regenerative approaches of learning, living, and being. Firstly, to move beyond the self-centered (ego) towards interconnected and Earth-centered (eco) epistemologies. Secondly, we explore concrete examples of alternative schools that learn from, in and with nature through fostering innate care between students and Earth (in our own contexts, India and Germany). Thirdly, we reimagine possible futures of eco-peace-based approaches, and argue for a shift towards more peaceful and interconnected futures by integrating eco-peace principles, content and pedagogies into current education systems.

KEYWORDS:

• Nature-based learning
• eco-epistemologies
• regenerative learning
• co-constructed auto-ethnography
• peace education
• interconnectedness

Introduction: interconnected peace education in times of crises – more than just palliative care?

In light of the current climate crisis, Climate Justice and eco-peace must no longer be a vision of dreamers but rather an urgent priority reflected in policy and practice (Lopes Cardozo 2008; Rincón-Gallardo 2020). Our unsustainable ways of living and capitalistic growth focus have led to several global crises, including those of climate, equity, social justice, epistemes, and holistic wellbeing (Cremin forthcoming; Patel 2023). Exploitative use of natural resources, loss of liveable spaces, and species extinction further exacerbate and multiply the external challenges, crises, and violences we face today. Mang and Haggard (2016, xiii) suggest that what is required to address the multitude of challenges is ‘[…]a different kind of mind, one that can creatively navigate multiple overlapping systems – economic, social, ecological, and political’. Therefore, in times of multiple crises, it is indispensable to consider Peace Education as more than just palliative care, seeing it as a tool for cultural and psychological transformation in our ways of being, doing and learning.

Modern education systems and international development have predominantly focused on access to education, literacy, and numeracy skills in relation to economic development, neglecting ecocentrism and a focus on holistic well-being for every child. At the root of these systems’ crisis, lies the illusion that we are separate from nature, and from one another (Patel 2023). The aim then, of an interconnected peace education beyond human-centric learning, is to recognise ourselves as part of the whole, being in symbiotic relationship with the interconnected systems that make up the places we inhabit (Mang and Haggard 2016).

As peace educators and researchers, we are thinking about two major questions for education in the 21st century. The first one concerns how education systems can move beyond anthropocentric ways of learning while truly centering holistic wellbeing of students within interrelated ecosystems? The second question is how to educate children to become regenerative peacemakers in the 21st-century world, breaking out of (post)colonial structures, patriarchal dominance, and exploitative ways of being. Consequently, recognising ourselves as part of the problem and possible solutions, we call for different ways of living and being, centered around interconnected eco-peace. [Author A] draws on her ethnographically-informed doctoral research project with a public forest Montessori school in Germany. [Author B]’s research, based in India, explores indigenous and decolonial approaches to holistic education as practiced in schools inspired or set up by Indian thinkers like Aurobindo, Gandhi, Krishnamurti, and Tagore.

Methodology

Throughout this article, we intertwine a reflexive, dialogic, and embodied writing approach; integrating theory and personal lived (research) experiences, while collaborating across differences from our respective previous research projects in India and Germany. Methodologically we are drawing on the emerging form of collective writing (Jandrić et al. 2022; Peters et al. 2021), foregrounding a critical collective sense of knowledge-production and acknowledging processes of meaning-making as communal and co-creative. Cann and DeMelenaere (2012) frame this methodology as ‘critical co-constructed auto-ethnography’, locating its roots in critical theory, critical pedagogy and critical race theory, drawing on social-justice oriented, decolonial, feminist and indigenous approaches, and allowing for collaborative meaning-making across differences. Additionally, critical co-constructed auto-ethnography allows us to ‘describe and systematically analyse personal experience in order to understand cultural experience’ (Carolyn, Adams, and Bochner 2011, 1). As co-creative critical auto-ethnographers, we realise that even when choosing a critical co-creative writing approach, the act of deciding what and whom we include and exclude, shapes the discourse and demonstrates an act of power (Cardozo 2023). Our goal with this methodology is to offer an analytical and accessible dialogue, which has the power to transform our own understandings of the world, while also informing the larger field and working towards social justice (Carolyn, Adams, and Bochner 2011). In doing so, we invite you, the reader, to reflect on your own lived experiences and about parts of our writing that resonate with you or meet resistance.

Context to Carlotta’s work with the German forest school

Through my past research I have been exploring ways of reimagining education for peace in the context of Montessori Education (Ehrenzeller forthcoming). By highlighting the importance of decolonising Montessori Education as a Western education approach and using critical and place-based perspectives, my research offers insights into the complexities of how contemporary Montessori schools across contexts concretely educate for peace, but also how they potentially sustain the violent structures the approach is hoping to transform (Ehrenzeller forthcoming).¹ I primarily employ ethnographically-informed research methods such as observation, drawing, interviews and focus group discussions with students, teachers and the school management, complemented with embodied approaches such as data poetry, reflexive podcasting, and in-depth ethnographic portraits. Data from this article derives from my four months of fieldwork in a public German forest Montessori class with students aged six to nine.

Context to Jwalin’s work in the Indian schools

Over the past decade, I have been researching alternative schools in India through several research studies and have explored educational philosophy, teachers’ perceptions and experiences, pedagogical practices, and school-wide systems and cultures. I have been questioning the purpose of modern education systems for over a decade, leading me to explore and look at various indigenous models of holistic education in India. Various Indian thinkers (as previously described) have called for significantly different visions for education, one centered around inner transformation and social change. Many of these thinkers have set up and/or inspired several alternative schools that continue to pursue and further develop these visions (some have done so for over a century).

A crisis in our ways of learning, living and being

Jwalin:

Let me start us on this co-constructive dialogue by sharing that I believe that the underpinning root cause of today’s crises lies in our ways of learning, living and being. We have conveniently pushed away recognition of interconnectedness and inclusive ways of living and being, coming from indigenous knowledge systems and quantum sciences (Cajete 1994; Mani 2013; Srikantiah and Patel forthcoming; Wu 2023). Modern societies frequently adopt throw-away consumerist, materialistic, anthropocentric, extractive and exploitive, reductionist, fragmentary (or divisive), and self-centric ways of living and being. Modernisation and coloniality have repeatedly promoted singular ways of learning, living and being, leading to a loss of social, cultural, and ecological diversity. We see this drive for monoculturalism across industries, including architecture, agriculture, education, and design (Cremin forthcoming; Patel 2023; Shiva 1999).

These ways of living and being stem from underpinning epistemologies of a) separation and fragmentation; and b) anthropocentrism and self-centrism. The epistemology of fragmentation underpins perceptions of living and non-living things being independent, humans being separate from other living beings, and human societies and nations as being independent of each other (Mani 2013). This epistemology of fragmentation and separation pervades most of our systems and lives (Mang and Haggard 2016; Mani 2013). We arbitrarily fragment our lives into boxes allocated for work (working to continue living) and life (living to continue working), segregate real-world phenomena into disciplines and divide individuals into labels and stereotypes. This results in societies divided by gender, class, caste, religion, and race, and schools dividing children and concepts by age and subjects. The epistemology of separation divides societies and people to the point where each person is left to fend for themselves within a socially unequal and inequitable world. It inevitably leads to a struggle for and an emphasis on self-preservation and human-centric development – further leading to everything (and everyone) else being treated and perceived as objects that one can (over)use, misuse, ravage, exploit and pollute for individual/societal development instead of being treated as living beings to live in harmony with. This fragmented, self-centric epistemology gets further transferred across to perceiving and treating other human beings as objects that one can enslave, abuse, and use for self-growth and development.

Carlotta:

Your reflection makes me think that perhaps we are Inter-beings in reality. We are deeply interconnected with all other beings and phenomena in the world. Our existence is integrated and interdependent. We are entangled within the web of life. Being an inter-being means recognizing that our (well)being, our choices and our actions have ripple effects on the interconnected fabrics of existence.

Before we dive deeper, I find it crucial to acknowledge that Indigenous communities have been honoring Earth and living in much more interconnected ways for centuries (Cajete 1994; Four Arrows 2018; Mani 2013; Srikantiah and Patel forthcoming). Indigenous approaches to living and being have been historically erased and ignored, echoing narratives of settler colonialism. This lack of acknowledgement also furthers the erasure of Indigenous peoples and continues to perpetuate unjust realities. To move forward, we have to also acknowledge and learn by looking backwards. To embark on the journey of regenerative learning, we are required to live the questions of our time as a collective, rather than seeking final answers and relying on predetermined individual paths Wahl (2016).

Jwalin:

If I may be bold, I suggest that perhaps we are facing a crisis not just of learning, living, and being but also a crisis of consciousness. In order to cater to these various local and global issues, perhaps we need to learn, live, and be from and in a different level of consciousness. This resonates with various spiritual, indigenous scholars, including Rumi, Gandhi, Aurobindo, who have called for a transformation of consciousness. It also reminds me of the popularized maxim of ‘No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it’.² Wu (2023) explains ‘The consciousness that fuelled capitalist growth at the expense of Nature and other beings cannot eliminate global poverty or reverse ecological degradation by means of amassing more material abundance; it will only lead to greater environmental destruction and social exploitation’. Therefore, Wu (2023) conceives that the transformation of one’s consciousness is fundamental to social change.

What is eco-peace?

Carlotta:

To build on your argument, Jwalin, our perception of eco-peace encompasses this different form of consciousness and, consequently, these different epistemologies. One main goal of eco-peace, resonating with regenerative education, is for students to recognize the interconnectedness and interdependence of all. But what is eco-peace? The term ecology originates from the Greek word ‘oikos’, meaning household, home or environment. ‘Logos’ can be translated to ‘the study of’. Ecology therefore refers to the study of our shared home: the (home) environment. We understand eco-peace as bringing together both ecology and holistic peace by interweaving peaces throughout ecosystems and by recognizing the interconnectedness and interdependence of all.

The concept of ecological peace has become increasingly prevalent since the 1970s (Wenden 2004). However, we extend that to include a deep recognition of the interconnectedness and interdependence of all (Brantmeier 2013; Patel 2023). Further, eco-peace-based approaches establish genuine care in students towards the ecosystems around us, not based on a theoretical understanding of the necessity thereof but based on a reciprocal relationship (Golden 2016; Noddings 1992). In a similar vein, education for peace is furthering ecological responsibility when children begin to view themselves as a part of nature rather than apart of nature (Bajaj and Chiu 2009). Kumar (2017) puts forward the idea that peace is a way of living and being in harmony with Earth, oneself and all beings. He further underlines this with his call for ‘soil, soul, society’ as a new trinity for our current time, focusing on Earth, the self, and others as a way of living and being. What, then, is our responsibility as peace educators and researchers to support children to move from a value system and dominant attitude of ego to eco and ultimately towards integrated eco-peace? Jwalin, how do you perceive this call for soil, soul, society as a way toward holistic peace? Have you come across similar notions in your own research or personal life?

Jwalin:

I strongly relate to Satish Kumar’s ideas. My work focuses on learning to live together harmoniously (2023), and I too, call for harmony with oneself, with others around, and with the larger world (including nature, other living beings and non-living things). I fundamentally conceptualize eco-peace as a way of living and being that embodies a constant appreciation of interconnectedness and interdependence worldwide. It entails a transition from the ego (self-centric) to the eco. I believe the way we use the term eco is not just an emphasis on the environment but rather recognizes the interconnectedness within the larger world. Therefore, in this sense, eco-peace is not just about the environment but also about critical social justice, equity, and wellbeing. Additionally, in my opinion, eco-peace is more than just a conceptual phrase but rather a way of knowing, living, and being. Let me share a reflexive example of my experiences living with someone who, in my opinion, embodied these ideas of eco-peace.

I spent a greater part of my childhood living in a spiritual community. Brahmavedantji (the spiritual leader) had a profound understanding of interconnectedness, a sense of wonder, deep empathy, and was the epitome of compassion. He and other ashramites and visitors dedicated themselves to shram (physical service) on a daily basis and over time have had extensive impact. They reforested large pieces of arid land, desalinated farmland across several villages by developing an exquisite system for rainwater harvesting, diverting and storing flood water, supporting the percolation of water into the aquifers. Additionally, in the process, they transformed abandoned mines and spaces into public spaces and institutions (including a school, bakery, and community kitchen). This has in turn, improved local livelihoods and lifestyles, biodiversity and natural balance across several villages in the area. And notably, all of this was done with no hue and cry. These initiatives were always viewed with the utmost humility, as if they were nothing special. Instead, they were considered a natural, nature-friendly, and obvious response to what needed to be done. In one of my interactions where I asked him about how he came up with such an exquisite plan, he explained that there was no rocket science in it, they were just small tweaks leading to ripple effects.

I believe that ecopeace should not be restricted to a theoretical concept but has to be consciously lived and practiced regularly as a way of living and being. The vignette, to me, highlights the importance of living through an understanding of interconnectedness (of one and the world, social and self-transformation, inner and ecological peace).

Carlotta:

Your example of Brahmavedantji is powerful. It illustrates the importance of recognising the connection between self-development and inner consciousness, in order to meaningfully create a consciousness for the interconnectedness of systems, and ultimately serve systems change (Sanford 2020; Wu 2023). I want to add that we are not calling for a shift from self-centrism to completely ignoring oneself. No, self-discovery, self-care, and self-compassion are crucial and indispensable. Instead, the transition from eco to ego transgresses this binary of ‘self’ versus ‘without self’. The eco is a deeper recognition of the interconnectedness of all living forms, including oneself. If we realize that we are part of Earth, not separate but one, we recognize that our actions go beyond the self or the local community and influence the larger ecosystems we are part of.

Could we turn our attention and reflect on what eco-peace based approaches to education can look like concretely and how learning would be transformed?

Recognizing pockets of resistance: exploring students’ entanglement with nature and themselves across our research projects in India and Germany

Jwalin and Carlotta:

There are several alternative, indigenous and holistic philosophies of learning and living that contrast the mainstream education systems and its underpinning epistemologies. Several Indian thinkers have called for education for harmony (Patel 2023), education of the heart (Gandhi 1968), education of the spirit (Aurobindo and The Mother 1977), education for inner flowering (Krishnamurti 2000), and decolonial education through Nai Talim (Bhave 1996; Jain 2023). This reminds us of one of Tagore’s (1917, 116–117) quotes where he called for education for harmony

According to the school, life is perfect when it allows itself to be treated as dead, to be cut into symmetrical conveniences. […] We may become powerful by knowledge, but we attain fullness by sympathy. The highest education is that which does not merely give us information but makes our life in harmony with all existence. But we find that this education of sympathy is not only systematically ignored in schools, but it is severely repressed.

Across both India and Germany pockets of resistance have existed as long as mainstream education has been around. Individual schools and thinkers such as Dewey (1916), Freire (2017), Gandhi (1968), Krishnamurti (2000), Steiner (1999), Montessori (1992), Tagore (1929, 1962), and The Mother (and Aurobindo; 1977) have been pushing for alternative ways of learning and education. There are a variety of schools (and higher education eco-versities) today that practice seeing interconnectedness, interweaving living and being in and with nature, with each other, and within ourselves. Peace is understood holistically and interconnected, much like in ways in which we understand eco-peace.

Carlotta:

Let me share one example of such a pocket of resistance from my research with a public German Forest Montessori class. I have created a data poem (Galvin and Prendergast 2016) by rearranging the multitude of participants’ voices into a mosaic-like spoken-word narrative consisting of direct quotes from the 1:1 interviews with participants. As the researcher, I hope that this data poem lets you hear the participants’ voices, hopes and challenges about their relationship with nature through their words rather than mine. Take a moment, breath and pause.k

Into the forest school (an excerpt)

Voices from students age 6–9 and teachers from a Forest-Montessori School in Germany

Compiled by Carlotta Ehrenzeller

[…]

I was unhappy for a while.

This being in the forest has helped me regain footing in life.

I changed incredibly.

Became totally calm.

Children feel the same way: they find

Peace

here.

When we go into the forest, it feels like you’re freed from bad things.

Going outside somehow clears your heart.

In the forest, I feel like

time stops with the fears I have; that these things can not happen.

I feel so much Myself.

You see this light, breaking in the trees.

The air, what you breathe. The soundscape that is actually there.

Just go outside.

A lot of my friends say

‘even though I might earn less than them’,

because that’s how it pays to be an educator, which I don’t care about,

but they say

‘I’m so well-balanced, relaxed, always in a good mood.’

They,

earn twice as much.

Only stressed, only problems,

complains all day.

Heart attack in their mid-50s.

Burn-out.

I’m far away from that.

My Feeling: The forest is totally good

for all of us.

Why not learn from nature, with nature?

Just being outside.

Breaking

through these classic, confined spaces.

No ties to spaces, and spatial thinking.

Flowing like a river.

[…]

How does this poem resonate with you? I invite you to reflect: how can eco-peace principles be integrated into your approach to research, education and everyday life, both as a student or an educator? When I read this poem, it reminds me of Tagore (1929) highlighting to his students that they have two teachers: a human one and a much wiser teacher; nature. In our previous paper, Nature as a Peace Educator (Patel and Ehrenzeller 2023), we built upon Tagore’s argument of nature as a teacher which came out prevalent in both our research projects. We called for learning with and from nature, as opposed to about nature and advocated for a move towards recognizing the interconnectedness within the world around us. The role education can play in innately reconnecting children with nature came out strongly for me in this spoken-word mosaic. I am curious to hear about the various schools in India which see living and being in nature as an integral part of learning.

Jwalin:

Carlotta that is a powerful poem. From my own experience as a practitioner, researcher and an inter-being, I believe that nature teaches us how to live harmoniously, how to love, how to connect and how to be. Nature and its aesthetics, silence, beauty and natural cycles influence children and teachers alike. Being in and with Nature supports wellbeing, and builds an intrinsic understanding of concepts like interconnectedness, cycles of change, circularity, impermanence, diversity based oneness, coexistence, complexity and nonlinearity. Various Indian thinkers have proactively called for a nature-based education; for example, Krishnamurti (2000) and Tagore (1929; 1962) emphasized that nature helps build sensitivity, empathy and a feeling of oneness with the world around them. This ultimately shapes human beings who learn to live in harmony with oneself, others and the larger world (human, natural, and non-living) (O’Connell 2003; Patel 2021; Tagore 1929; Thapan 2001).

As we highlighted in the introduction, we have to move beyond learning about nature (through theoretical textbook-centered approaches and in fragmented subjects like biology and environmental sciences) to learning with and from nature. We refer to the latter as nature-based education, and it can be understood in three distinct ways. First, students can visit forests or nature-filled spaces on a regular basis (during an allocated time), spending a part of their school week within nature (and hopefully with other classroom-based activities engaging students in reflection and expression of their experiences within the ‘forest classes’). Second, where either schools are based in forests or school campuses have large plantations. This would lead to students constantly being in touch with, interacting with and coexisting in and with nature as they spend time at the school (and in addition, this would also allow opportunities for more structured time and learning about, with and from nature). Third, where schools embody eco(nature)-centric epistemologies and approaches all across their school-wide processes, ethos and cultures. This requires actively reflecting, restructuring, and rewilding education, educational approaches and practices.

Most of the alternative schools that I have been working with do the latter two. Most of them are embedded in nature; those based in more remote areas are situated within forests and valleys, and those based in urban cities have been nurturing and developing urban forests. In either case, children were involved in reforestation efforts where they constantly took care of trees (and were taken care of by the trees) across their schooling years. However, many schools went a step further and tried to embody eco-peace based epistemologies and approaches within and across the schools. Many of the schools actively reflected upon the meaning of education and embodied nature-inspired ideas like autonomy (for both teachers and students), interconnectedness, impermanence, circularity and nonlinearity, care within all their relations, processes, ethos, and cultures (Patel 2023). These indigenous, alternative, reflective epistemologies of education counter and challenge the educational approaches in mainstream schools.

Reimagining futures of eco-peace based education

Carlotta and Jwalin:

The pertinent question is- How do we get to a future where eco-peace-based education becomes the norm? We have frequently discussed two (of many) possible ways forward, their respective feasibility and what actually drives this change. There is a growing movement for step-by-step changes and reforms that can be observed around the world. In India, the new national education policy is a move in the right direction, for example, with the rollout of happiness curricula wherein children in public schools spend an hour a day on socioemotional learning. There is also a growing interest in forest schools and nature-based pedagogies in various European countries. Authors like Mycock (2020) and Debaja (2021) highlight the role of nature-based pedagogies in shaping children’s innate relationship with nature as well as the physical, emotional, and psychological benefits perceived for children.

Step-by-step approaches require time. In light of the climate emergency, we do not know how much time human society has left. Additionally, a common sentiment is that the current system is beyond redemption and requires a complete overhaul (Ball and Collet-Sabé 2022; Cremin forthcoming). Ball and Collet-Sabé (2022) notably refer to modern schools as an ‘intolerable’ institution where no amount of school improvement can add up to a transformation. There has been a consistent call for a complete paradigm shift: out with the old, in with the new. Then perhaps the answer could be a complete systems overhaul – but what would trigger such a massive shift? Is there a specific trigger point after which changes are forced upon us, and have we not already reached it several times with the pandemic, environmental crisis, and ongoing wars? Also, commonly with overhauls and revolutions, new systems recreate previous ones or new violences and inequalities that disproportionately affect people experiencing poverty.

We are inclined to think that both piece-by-piece and overhaul-based approaches are happening simultaneously. However, transformation requires that we connect our own inner consciousness in order to contribute to meaningful change across interconnected systems (Sanford 2020). If not approached critically, both the piece-by-piece method and complete overhauls can recreate existing or new divides. Instead of a binary of two approaches, we call for a critical transformation of our consciousness. This would allow for both alternatives to coexist- wherein the step-by-step approach allows for a transformation of existent systems and the complete overhaul experiments and pushes the boundaries of what can be with both being actively interlinked where the findings of one feed into the other (Mang and Haggard 2016; Sanford 2020). This might lead to an eco-peace embodied, peace-by-peace approach to educational transformation. Such an approach can be inclusive of everyone, until systems change holistically, prioritizing processes over outcomes.

Transforming our own ways of living and being

Jwalin:

Going back to Wu’s (2023) and Sanford’s (2020) recommendation that social transformation begins with self-transformation, I find it important that we as researchers, practitioners, and human beings reflect on our journeys in trying to embody eco-peace based ways of knowing, living and being (Patel and Kevin 2023). I believe that transforming one’s ways of living and being is a lifelong journey and requires conscious effort. Embodying eco-peace is challenging, so let me start by reflecting on two personal efforts to walk my talk (Sanford 2020; Wu 2023). Firstly, exploring the journey of integrating my practitioner and researcher identities and secondly, by reflecting on the challenges of holding onto eco-peace-based ways of living within social change-making processes.

First, over the past few years, I have straddled the binary of my positionality as a practitioner-academic (pracademic) and have struggled to integrate them together. My academic work has focused on holistic education, while my practitioner work (coordinating an educational charity in India) frequently comes down to supporting/promoting mass educational practices within under-resourced communities. Both these identities operated in separate silos, and the fragmentation often perturbed me. Over time, I tried to become a more conscious pracademic by bringing various ideas of holistic education into my work. It never lived up to any measure of holistic education; at best, I trained different parts of the child in separate spatiotemporal silos. More recently, I have been able to bring about a deeper integration of the two.

Second, I have hoped to be mindful of interconnectedness in social change-making processes consciously. However, it has been a challenge. An eco-peace-based approach to social change-making would largely be process-oriented (as an outcome would be perceived as a result of many interconnected factors), would never associate any outcome to the doer (/changemaker), and put inner self-transformation at the equal footing as affecting outwardly change. I have frequently struggled with many of these. I have, however, developed a distaste for the connotations that the word changemaker carries; I wonder what an alternative form of an eco-peace approach could be? Carlotta, what does embodying eco-peace mean to you in your own ways of learning, living and being?

Carlotta:

I practise to embody eco-peace by training my consciousness, that I am inter-being with all that is around me. For example, by approaching my surroundings, people, places, trees and rivers from a place of love and care. I aim to ground my various roles and the way I approach research and writing in truth and love (Sanford 2020). For me, activism and transformation are not just happening by protesters on the street; they are equally an internal journey relying on self-reflection and conscious change. I used to focus on visible and concrete changes as the only form of fundamental contributions to activism and just systems transformation. Today I see grounding the various roles I play in love as one way of ‘constructive activism’, challenging injustices and cruelty. Hooks (2001) argues that ‘Love is profoundly political. Our deepest revolution will come when we understand this truth’. Simplicity is revolutionary. Creative, constructive action is activism, in the same way that care, knowledge and love have protected biodiversity for millennia (Cajete 1994; Four Arrows 2018; Kimmerer 2020; Shiva 1999). For me, even writing can be seen as a way of activism that honours our reciprocal responsibilities with and to the world.

Additionally, inspired by Steiner-Knox (2022), I try to find moments throughout my day to remember that I am nature. The water I drink connects me to Earth’s water cycles, and the food I eat comes directly from the soil, cared for by the hands of humans. The air I am breathing, and the land that is holding me. Sometimes I am frustrated and wonder whether the impact of peace education in the way we have practised it for centuries and what we do as researchers and academics are enough. As a white, Swiss woman, I critically question my positionality that connects me to my ancestors and the land I write from. How can I, how can we deal with these tensions between personal healing and care (inward) and political actions and systemic responsibility (outward)?

Since we started conceptualising this article calling for eco-peace, wars, epidemics and climate disasters continue to take and impact millions of lives. And yet, I believe in the power of educating for embodied eco-peace and that me typing these words and you reading these words matters. Children have the right to experience the interconnection to themselves, to us as a human community, to a liveable Earth and beyond. We are one interconnected Earth. Nature is not out there in the forests, rivers, mountains, in wildlife, birds and oceans (Brantmeier 2013; Kumar 2017); we are not here isolated in our enclosed homes or offices. Although it might seem like disjoint realities, we are all Earth.

Conclusive reflections for the reader

Scholars of education for sustainable development and environmental education have frequently called for education about the environment and raising awareness for sustainability (Brantmeier 2013, 2018; Debaja 2021; Patel and Ehrenzeller 2023; Sanford 2020; Wahl 2016). We further extend this notion of interconnected and regenerative systems to conceptualize eco-peace-based approaches to knowing, living and being. Regenerative systems thinking is about (un)learning, knowing, doing, being, caring and transforming (Cardozo 2023; Sanford 2020, Wahl 2016). An eco-peace approach, then, would fundamentally recognize the interconnectedness and interdependence across all life forms, systems and the cosmos. Therefore, drawing inspiration from the wisdom of indigenous thinkers and regenerative systems thinking, we expand this call for learning with, in and from nature (Patel and Ehrenzeller 2023).

We explored several alternative schools that adopt nature-based approaches, such as time spent in nature, constant interaction with forests interwoven into schools or vice versa, and/or schools embodying eco-peace-based practices and epistemologies that foster innate care between students and Earth. These schools act as pockets of resistance against the various global crises of living and being, crises of epistemologies, and, as we argue, crises of consciousness. The schools in Germany and India that we discussed in this article have actively reflected upon and restructured their educational approaches to embody eco-peace values of interconnectedness, love, compassion and innate care. We believe that a multi-tiered, multi-stepped process (Lane et al. 2012) can be initiated within existing systems in order to lead to meaningful change. We may gradually shift towards a more peaceful and interconnected future by integrating eco-peace principles, content, pedagogies and love into current education systems. While larger system change either happens all at once, through forceful change such as natural or man-made disaster or forceful dictatorship or takes time, we call upon you, fellow peace education researchers, educators and academics, to embody eco-peace in your own lives. Sanford (2020) reminds us that we do not need more heroes or do-gooders who see themselves as isolated actors, rather we need internal paradigm shifts of millions of people.

Transformation necessitates persistent efforts to forge a liveable and peace-full (as opposed to the current peace-empty) future for all. Eco-peace education is, as we have argued, a caring way to transgress anthropocentric ways of learning, living and being towards interconnected, peaceful futures. To conclude, we invite you to take a deep breath. To pause. We invite you to reflect: How are you right now interconnected with Earth? How can you think better about your own various roles that influence our shared world? What could eco-peace-based approaches to education, peace research, and your own life look like?

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Carlotta Ehrenzeller

Carlotta Ehrenzeller is a doctoral researcher and Klaus Murmann fellow (Foundation of German Economic) at the University of Cambridge. Her research focuses on holistic learning, climate justice, nature-based learning approaches, and Montessori Education. She is particularly interested in participatory and decolonial methodologies, data poetry, embodied methods and reflexive knowledge creation. Carlotta completed her MPhil (2019) at Cambridge in Education, Globalization and International Development, focusing on teacher retention in rural Bangladesh. Since then, she has been working and researching peace education, focusing on South-East Asia, Europe and Australia.

Jwalin Patel

Jwalin Patel is an independent researcher at Together In Development & Education (TIDE) Foundation. He is particularly interested in educational philosophy, classroom pedagogy, and teacher professional development. His current work focuses on education for harmony and learning to live together and their underpinning classroom practices, school-wide ethos and systems, interventions and policies in the global south. He is also actively involved in grassroots-level reform as the cofounder of two charities in India and a consultant to various Indian and international development organisations that work on social-emotional learning, peace education, teacher capacity development and teacher wellbeing.

Notes

1. By not addressing and engaging with certain topics such as indigenous histories, structural inequalities, migration, white settler colonialism or ecological exploitation, Montessori Education can reproduce existing violent structures and oppressions. To strive towards a more equitable, just and inclusive approach to Montessori Education, the Montessori community must address existing violent structures, asymmetric power dynamics and ongoing coloniality and its concrete consequences in social, political and economic structures.

2. The original source of this quote remains unknown, with people frequently misquoting Einstein.